Israel
- Thread starter Tru Principle
- Start date
Maybe Bin Laden shouldn't have blown up our embassies in Africa and killed 200 people. And maybe that independent country shouldn't have been sheltering him in 1998.
I love how Clinton gets criticized for that attack now. Republicans were criticizing him for it back then. Imagine the type of shit Republicans would be saying after 9/11 now if Clinton hadn't done those airstrikes after the embassy bombings.
The analogy you made is even dumber when one understands that Israel's president is a figurehead position with no governmental powers. It'd be like blaming the British government for the actions of Queen Elizabeth. And of course, the suggestion that the invasion of Lebanon was a distraction is just plain absurd, considering Hezbollah, unprovoked, fired dozens of rockets at civilian locations, crossed into Israel and kidnapped Israelis on July 12. I'd love to know what you consider a justifiable provocation if that's not one.
But then again, what the hell do I know? Since I have an opinion that moderators don't like, I'm automatically wrong and every post of mine is fit for deletion. So maybe you're right after all.
I love how Clinton gets criticized for that attack now. Republicans were criticizing him for it back then. Imagine the type of shit Republicans would be saying after 9/11 now if Clinton hadn't done those airstrikes after the embassy bombings.
The analogy you made is even dumber when one understands that Israel's president is a figurehead position with no governmental powers. It'd be like blaming the British government for the actions of Queen Elizabeth. And of course, the suggestion that the invasion of Lebanon was a distraction is just plain absurd, considering Hezbollah, unprovoked, fired dozens of rockets at civilian locations, crossed into Israel and kidnapped Israelis on July 12. I'd love to know what you consider a justifiable provocation if that's not one.
But then again, what the hell do I know? Since I have an opinion that moderators don't like, I'm automatically wrong and every post of mine is fit for deletion. So maybe you're right after all.
Enough ragging on Clinton for his Bin Laden blunders, although he could have caught him with a word to the CIA he got closer than our present president, a lot closer. And Israel's decision to unjustly bomb the fuck out of Lebanon was not because of these scandals, like Morris said the President is just a figurehead with no powers so the government would just let him take the punishment for the scandals and not try to distract the public. They attacked Lebanon cuz Hezbollah gave them an opening to do what the Israelis have developed into a national past-time; killing Arabs.
:woah: You totally misplaced my words. I must clear couple of things...
First of all, I was making comparasion between Clinton and Katsav on the different level. Bill Clinton attacked one independent country in 1999 (my country - Serbia) during his mandate to, amongst other things, distract public eyes from his sex scandal. I was pointing that Katsav made similar thing. I was sarcastic but I didn't say nothing more...
Since you are touched the subject way deeper I think that it would be appropriate to respond you. Your ignorance about situation in the Middle East and in the whole World is remarkable. That is visible from every single of your posts. Do you honestly think that Bin Laden and alikes are the real target of the 'war on terror'? Man, the stake is much higher - it's the freedom of the World which U.S.A. and allies successfully stifle. Our generation will soon wake up in the society where totalitarianism rules.
I won't justify muslims who took guns in their hands and went in the war. On the other side, I won't justify judaism, hinduism, Christianity or atheism when they do the same. The roots of antagonism between religions and their followers are really deep. But, there is only one side which capitalize from the conditions which are present today and that's Roman Catholic church. Think little more and you'll know why. See whose influence rapidly grows in the time of crisis...
At the end, you probably didn't have such problems (which you mentioned) on this board if you showed more respect for the other people opinions. Try to be less stubborn and not quick to openly mock everything what's different from your aspect.
First of all, I was making comparasion between Clinton and Katsav on the different level. Bill Clinton attacked one independent country in 1999 (my country - Serbia) during his mandate to, amongst other things, distract public eyes from his sex scandal. I was pointing that Katsav made similar thing. I was sarcastic but I didn't say nothing more...
Since you are touched the subject way deeper I think that it would be appropriate to respond you. Your ignorance about situation in the Middle East and in the whole World is remarkable. That is visible from every single of your posts. Do you honestly think that Bin Laden and alikes are the real target of the 'war on terror'? Man, the stake is much higher - it's the freedom of the World which U.S.A. and allies successfully stifle. Our generation will soon wake up in the society where totalitarianism rules.
I won't justify muslims who took guns in their hands and went in the war. On the other side, I won't justify judaism, hinduism, Christianity or atheism when they do the same. The roots of antagonism between religions and their followers are really deep. But, there is only one side which capitalize from the conditions which are present today and that's Roman Catholic church. Think little more and you'll know why. See whose influence rapidly grows in the time of crisis...
At the end, you probably didn't have such problems (which you mentioned) on this board if you showed more respect for the other people opinions. Try to be less stubborn and not quick to openly mock everything what's different from your aspect.
actually the bombing of Serbia was by NATO
unless somehow bill clinton said "Ok guys, lets all bomb a country and keep peace keepers there for almost a decade so this blow-job incident will settle down, deal?" and they said "Well alright, sounds like a worthwhile plan", he didn't do it to get attention away from his own scandal
unless somehow bill clinton said "Ok guys, lets all bomb a country and keep peace keepers there for almost a decade so this blow-job incident will settle down, deal?" and they said "Well alright, sounds like a worthwhile plan", he didn't do it to get attention away from his own scandal
Clinton was in the process of being impeached by the House during the Balkans troubles (which spanned much more than a year, obviously). His actions weren't an attempt to distract from anything.
Was the President of the United States supposed to just sit in the White House on house arrest and do nothing until the scandal cleared? Of course not, he's got to continue doing his job.
The suggestion that he bombed Serbia for political expediency is made even more asinine by the fact that he couldn't run for reelection in 2000 and the GOP controlled both houses of Congress.
The West is fighting regimes and groups aiming to establish a theocratic Caliphate first across Europe and then across the world, and you accuse the West of totalitarianism and stifling freedom?
That's humorous.
Was the President of the United States supposed to just sit in the White House on house arrest and do nothing until the scandal cleared? Of course not, he's got to continue doing his job.
The suggestion that he bombed Serbia for political expediency is made even more asinine by the fact that he couldn't run for reelection in 2000 and the GOP controlled both houses of Congress.
The West is fighting regimes and groups aiming to establish a theocratic Caliphate first across Europe and then across the world, and you accuse the West of totalitarianism and stifling freedom?
That's humorous.
actually it has, morris posted
"The analogy you made is even dumber when one understands that Israel's president is a figurehead position with no governmental powers. It'd be like blaming the British government for the actions of Queen Elizabeth. "
and hes right, we don't see "BUSH AND QUEEN ELIZABETHS WAR ON OIL" protests do we? Its just a figurehead who has no power.
"The analogy you made is even dumber when one understands that Israel's president is a figurehead position with no governmental powers. It'd be like blaming the British government for the actions of Queen Elizabeth. "
and hes right, we don't see "BUSH AND QUEEN ELIZABETHS WAR ON OIL" protests do we? Its just a figurehead who has no power.
In Canada we have a govener general who is suppose to represent the queen, but he/she has no role in goverment, infact they're given the position by the goverment. Now should the govenor general be blamed for Canada's involvement in the war in Afghanistan? If the govenor general was indicted for money laundering should the whole country be blamed for it?
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.